He didn't say that. He said "the error" was maligned, not the BFM.It has been called that. And worse.Uh, I embrace the term Augustinian. It is much better than Calvinist. :)He did. But did you accept the apology? I don't recall you having done so. Correct me if I am wrong. :)I didn't see an accusations made against SBC BF. :)
Naming names
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Internet Theologian, Feb 29, 2016.
Page 6 of 7
-
-
-
'"The error" that is directly mentioned in this thread is part of the Baptist Faith and Message of the SBC.'
I think you're amiss here brother. He is saying what I am calling error is part of the Baptist Faith and Message, or, at the least that it is taking place in this thread.
He went on to say:
'It is very similar to what I believe.'
So, again, nowhere in this thread has this been done.
-
And your position on the Staff brings a greater responsibility not to be biased as your post implies. There is no hypothetical "He has error which is in his head only," as I said, let's keep it real. When you engage in a debate which demands one side be right, the other be wrong, you do not decide who is right.
Scripture does.
And I will have to agree with the OP...we have a responsibility to point out error. This is typical of Church Discipline. That basic principle is founded in the Old Testament, Israel being a prime example. The purpose was to maintain purity among the People of God. If one despised the Law, they were put to death. In physical terms this principle was enforced to the letter. Now that we have been given a view into eternal truths and a greater knowledge, that responsibility becomes greater.
So again, I think you are confusing what your true authority actually is.
And that's about all I have to say on this particular subject.
God bless. -
-
And don't think I didn't notice you posted the "heart" icon on my posts. Trying to "kill me with kindness?" LOL! :D :D :D -
-
We’ve been discussing (or trying to discuss) whether it is appropriate to “name names” in regards to false teachers, and if so how would this be done biblically. I wonder if this also applies on the other end of the spectrum.
We all have certain people that we turn to for teaching. There are commentators that resonate with us, that we trust, and that we know God has put there for our benefit and our teaching. The issue, of course, is that we do not always agree on who these people are. Is there a sense where Christians take to “naming names” in regards to validating doctrine rather than dealing with the doctrine itself? -
-
Three pronged too! I knew it, '6,6,6'!!! BiggrinAlienGeek
-
Almost to the seventh page and the author of the OP has yet to address the following:
Why among those listed that are LIVING, who obviously embrace at least some element of the charismatic thinking .. would he include one long dead, who was a triple doctor of theology, who was and is highly regarded, was a prolific writer, and a person of stellar character?
Pages have passed, and you have provided absolutely no Scripture showing violations as proof for your claim against Chafer. If your going to "name names" then doing such obliges documentation that is verifiable by the general readers of the BB.
However, I am not certain that you have either the authority or right. You are not part of the God head, you are not an apostle, nor are you an eye witness to the Christ. Therefore, you do not qualify by the list of people you claim to be in standing. It seems a Biblical stretch for one to post "95 thesis" of a church of which they have no association. Luther understood that, and he was a racist.
You claim you have no agenda, but want discussion; however, that isn't the temperament of the OP. Rather, you want folks to join you in trash talking, maligning the character of others, those who are not even a part of the BB. -
SovereignGrace Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
I've read this whole thread and I've not seen where Bro. IT slammed and/or maligned the SBC BFM. He has taken a stance against free will and innate faith and Finneyism, but that's not even in the same solar system of slamming and/or maligning.
-
If by the other end of the spectrum you mean false teachers naming names, sure. But generally it is not a direct and specific naming, but more general (can't attest to what takes place in every fellowship). An example might be Dr. Michael Brown's address of MacArthur's Strange Fire. A direct address naming names. I wouldn't exactly call Brown a "false teacher," because I am confident he is a sincere believer. But he is definitely on the "other side" (not the Dark Side, lol), doctrinally speaking.
Many of the fellowships that take a name like "Bible Believing Baptist" are naming names in their very name. Go into one of these fellowships and the mentality is "We actually believe what the Bible teaches (as opposed to regular Baptist folk)."
Secondly, I think an important issue to consider, one I think we can all relate to, is that certain teachers will minister to believers according to the stage of development. A newer believer might here Sproul, for example, and not understand what he is talking about. They might better understand someone like MacArthur.
Third, consider that there are two types of believers in regards to Eternal Security (which I think is a primary Doctrine most will have an opinion on, and early on will not have a resolved position), we have those who without any doubt embrace Eternal Security, then those who, for a number of reasons, question this. For the former, MacArthur may "resonate," for the latter, Alistair Begg might resonate. Both are similar in views, but, if we listen to their teachings we will see that in regards to Eternal Security, the doctrine is approached differently. For those new in faith that are confused about how works impact our salvation, a teacher who teaches stronger in regards to our daily conduct might suit better. This doesn't mean I think MacArthur teaches a hyper grace message, he doesn't, but, I think he is far more clearer on this topic than most. In other words, he does not confuse the student like some do.
So now I have just submitted a few comments and I have named names. I have commented on a few and presented my understanding of them.
I see nothing wrong with that.
God bless. -
-
-
We don't ascribe the doctrine of the False teacher to God, that is the reason for naming names, because we see that they have violated what God has revealed.
And haven't see a request you speak of, and not sure why this wouldn't be relevant to the OP. But, I think I have said as much as I want to on this topic, so will bow out, and perhaps look for a thread (if it is created) which makes whatever it is you refer to the central focus.
Hope all have a blessed day.
God bless. -
Sent from my TARDIS -
-
God bless. -
I thought it was a general question, so that is how I addressed it.
God bless.
Page 6 of 7